The lead author expressed hope that the research 'will be of use to both conservation organizations and government agencies' amid a legal battle over protections for wolves in the northern Rocky Mountains.
Grey Wolf, Malene Thyssen, WikimediaCommons
As U.S. conservationists continue to fight for federal protections
that would cover gray wolves in the northern Rocky Mountains,
research released Wednesday highlights just how important the apex
predators are to the western United States.
The study was published in the journal BioScience and led by William
Ripple, a scientist at Oregon State University (OSU) and the
Conservation Biology Institute known for his work on trophic
cascades and carnivores as well as his demands for climate action.
The paper uses gray wolves to show the trouble with "shifting
baselines," which, "in ecology encapsulate the gradual and often
unnoticed alterations in ecosystems over time, leading to a
redefinition of what is considered normal or baseline conditions."
As the study details:
Gray wolves (Canis lupus) in North America have experienced a substantial contraction of their historical range, at one point almost disappearing from the contiguous 48 United States. However, their conservation is important in part because of the potential cascading effects wolves can have on lower trophic levels. Namely, the proliferation and changes to behavior and density of large herbivores following the extirpation or displacement of wolves can have major effects on various aspects of vegetation structure, succession, productivity, species composition, and diversity, which, in turn, can have implications for overall biodiversity and the quality of habitat for other wildlife.
"By the 1930s, wolves were largely absent from the American West,
including its national parks," Ripple said in a statement. "Most
published ecological research from this region occurred after the
extirpation of wolves."
"This situation underscores the potential impact of shifting
baselines on our understanding of plant community succession, animal
community dynamics, and ecosystem functions," he continued.
The researchers examined journal articles, master's theses, and
Ph.D. dissertations from 1955 to 2021 that involved field work in
national parks in the northwestern United States for whether they
included information on the removal of gray wolves.
They found that "in total, approximately 41% (39 of 96) of the
publications mentioned or discussed the historical presence of
wolves or large carnivores, but most (approximately 59%) did not.
The results for the theses and journal articles were similar."
While the researchers focused on wolves, Robert Beschta, co-author
and emeritus professor at OSU, noted that "in addition to the loss
or displacement of large predators, there may be other potential
anthropogenic legacies within national parks that should be
considered, including fire suppression, invasion by exotic plants
and animals, and overgrazing by livestock."
Ripple stressed that "studying altered ecosystems without
recognizing how or why the system has changed over time since the
absence of a large predator could have serious implications for
wildlife management, biodiversity conservation, and ecosystem
restoration."
"We hope our study will be of use to both conservation organizations
and government agencies in identifying ecosystem management goals,"
he added.
"Nature is a really complex tapestry... When you start to pull
threads out like you remove apex predators, the whole thing begins
to unravel."
Amaroq Weiss, senior wolf advocate at the Center for Biological
Diversity (CBD), welcomed the study, tellingInside Climate News that
"I think this is a really important paper, because sometimes science
advances at a certain rate without a self-introspection."
"Nature is a really complex tapestry," she said. "It's woven
together by threads that hold it together and keep it strong. When
you start to pull threads out like you remove apex predators, the
whole thing begins to unravel."
The paper comes amid a wolf conservation battle that involves Weiss'
group. In February, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS)
determined that Endangered Species Act protections for the wolves in
the northern Rocky Mountains were "not warranted."
Two coalitions of conservation organizations, including CBD, swiftly
filed notices of their intent to sue over the decision if FWS didn't
change course. After the legally required 60-day notice period
passed, they filed the lawsuits in April.
Earlier this week, "the cases were voluntarily dismissed and
immediately refiled to avoid any potential arguments from the
defendants that the plaintiffs failed to give the secretary of the
interior proper 60-days' notice under the Endangered Species Act,"
Collette Adkins, an attorney who leads CBD's Carnivore Conservation
program, told Common Dreams in an email Thursday.
"Plaintiffs believe that their case was properly noticed," she said,
"but we refiled to avoid any further disruption of the
proceedings."